Speaking of a lack of virginity, the last thing I am interested in is David Letterman's sex life. (No really. Do I have to explain why?)

Just thought I'd point that out in case I'm accused of deliberately avoiding it. This is not to say that I'm in any way supportive of sexual harassment; even when I owned a nightclub business and employees as well as wannabe employees were offering themselves to me, I never, ever succumbed to temptation. Yes, I am human, and subject to human temptations. Of course, that might end; they say that when I'm 96 years old, sex with robots will finally become a reality. But as I pointed out before, it might be too late.

Anyway, the reason I never took advantage of my position of, um, "power" was that I thought it might interfere with business efficiency, and I think the Letterman scandal provides proof of that. Certainly he brought much of this on himself with the attacks on Sarah Palin's personal life. What did he expect? That his critics would ignore an opportunity dropped in their lap? Fair is fair.

Then of course there's the double standard. A conservative sex scandal means that conservatives are profoundly evil and bad and most of all hypocritical!

A liberal sex scandal means that all people are human and so we must forgive. Liberals, of course, get the benefit of at least being forgiven by other liberals. Conservatives are generally forgiven by no one. Well, maybe they're forgiven by annoying libertarians like me, but they're never forgiven by liberals, nor are they forgiven by their own "side."

Not only does this lead to a common stereotype of conservatives as unforgiving people, but it sets up liberals to be seen as forgiving, when they're anything but.

However, because of this seeming mutual agreement by both sides, unless you're one of them (as is Letterman), you will not be forgiven. For reasons that aren't clear to me, this double standard is actually seen as fair.

I think fair double standards are the unfairest double standards of all.